Dear John,
This is ancient history judging from the post date. Just the same - I
saw a post from you some time ago with the single word in the subject
line "unsubscribe". I'm not dreaming - I saw it. Did you lean on the
big, bright yellow unsubscribe button by mistake?
Kim Jones
On 16/12/2006, at 8:53 AM, John M wrote:
> Dear list:
> this was the last post I received (I think I am subscribed)
> Have I been (or the list?) terminated?
> John Mikes
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Bruno Marchal
> To: everything-list.domain.name.hidden
> Sent: Tuesday, November 21, 2006 5:27 AM
> Subject: Re: Natural Order & Belief
>
>
> John,
>
> You are right, I was wrong. Those deeds are not contingent. They
> probably appears automatically when one give a name to God.
>
> Perhaps, "God" could be "defined" by this: it is the one which is such
> that once you give it a name or a definition trouble appears.
>
> Obviously such a sentence should not be taken to much literally (if we
> do we are led to an obvious inconsistency).
>
> So, from now on, each time I use the word "God" it will means the
> impersonal big unnameable 0-person point of view, that is Plotinus'
> ONE, and/or some of its possible arithmetical (set theoretical)
> interpretation(s), that is arithmetical truth (resp. set theoretical
> truth).
>
> I will recall the theory in my reply to Tom Caylor.
>
> Bruno
>
>
>
>
>
> Le 20-nov.-06, à 18:03, John M a écrit :
>
> >
> > Bruno:
> > How far Occident? Quetzealcoatle was not much better.
> > Orientals? did they care at all? they were occupied
> > with their lovers. Germanics and Scandinavians? no
> > better, not to spek about Maori, African, Hawaiian
> > etc.
> > requiring virgins to be thrown into the Volcano. The
> > priests of the smarter ones ate them.
> > Did you notice the Catholic homophag rite: "Take it
> > and eat it: it is my body. Drink it: it is my blood.
> > And literary thousands of protestant rites follow
> > suit.
> > Muslims cleaned that up, they concentrate on heavennly
> > sex (hueis).
> > Sorry if I hurt feelings.
> > John
> >
> > --- Bruno Marchal <marchal.domain.name.hidden> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> Le 18-nov.-06, à 21:49, John M a écrit :
> >>
> >>> Why do the religions (almost all of them) depict a
> >> god after the worst
> >>> human
> >>> characters: jealous, flatterable, requiring praise
> >> and blind
> >>> obedience,
> >>> vengeful, irate, picking favorites,
> >>> even sadistic and not caring? Why does he punish
> >> for deeds done
> >>> exactly as
> >>> he created the sinner?
> >>
> >>
> >> I disagree with the "(almost all of them)". True,
> >> since a long time, in
> >> Occident, the main religions are based on such a
> >> "God", probably
> >> because he looks like the "terrifying father", very
> >> useful to
> >> manipulate people by fear and terror.
> >>
> >> But this is contingent, and eventually I take that
> >> sad contingent truth
> >> as a supplementary motivation to come back on
> >> "serious theology", by
> >> which I mean 3-person sharable theology (even if
> >> such a theology does
> >> talk about first person unsharable notion).
> >>
> >> Bruno
> >>
> >> http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> > >
> >
> >
> http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
>
>
>
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.14.11/543 - Release Date:
> 11/20/2006
>
>
> >
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list.domain.name.hidden
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list-unsubscribe.domain.name.hidden
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Received on Fri Dec 15 2006 - 19:20:33 PST